image description

State Orders Release of Pittsfield High Investigation Report

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Pittsfield Public Schools have been ordered to release non-exempt parts of the PHS investigation report by May 8 after a community advocate filed a public records request.

"Pittsfield residents deserve transparency when it comes to the actions of public officials within taxpayer-funded institutions," petitioner and Pittsfield resident Ciara Batory said in a press release on Monday.

 "The community has a right to understand how serious issues are investigated and addressed. This decision is a win for every parent, student, and resident who believes in open, honest governance."

Batory has children in the school system, she said, "although they are not yet in high school, I am deeply invested in the future of our entire school community." 

On April 1, Batory formally requested a copy of the investigative report into alleged wrongdoing by two administrators who have since been cleared by an outside investigation.

School officials initially promised complete transparency in the process but have since cited legality as a hurdle for releasing the report on "unsubstantiated" claims. Chair William Cameron said via email on Monday that the School Committee will discuss further action in executive session during Wednesday's regular meeting.

PPS initially denied Batory's public records request, and following an appeal to the secretary of the commonwealth's Public Records Division, Supervisor of Records Manza Arthur ruled on April 24 that the district failed to justify withholding the report in full and ordered that any non-exempt portions of the report be provided.

This ruling also suggests that the public interest in transparency and accountability may outweigh individual privacy concerns.

Batory provided screenshots of the ruling sent to Anne Marie Carpenter, PPS director of human resources, diversity, and inclusion.

"The School is ordered to provide Ms. Batory with a response to her request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (10) business days," it reads.

The district cited a couple of broad Public Records Law exemptions for its reasoning to withhold the report: a statuary exemption that allows the withholding of records that are specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by the statue and an exemption that applies to personnel, medical, or other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual where the disclosure may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.


"This exemption does not protect all data relating to specifically named individuals. Rather, there are factors to consider when assessing the weight of the privacy interest at stake: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual or normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources," Arthur wrote about the section exemption.

"…This exemption requires a balancing test, which provides that where the public interest in obtaining the requested information substantially outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy, the private interest in preventing disclosure must yield."

The secretary noted that the "public has recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law abiding and efficient manner."

Earlier this month, school officials requested a recap of the process and, if possible, the findings of Bulkley Richardson & Gelinas' investigation commissioned by the School Committee.

Last week, the City Council urged the School Committee to release a public summary of the findings from the independent investigation into staff misconduct at PHS. Councilors said they have been left in the dark along with the general public, so much so that Ward 1 Councilor Kenneth Warren also submitted a public records request.

Arthur determined that the district hasn't met its burden to withhold the entire record, and "it is uncertain how the record contains intimate details of a highly personal nature or how disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities. It is additionally not clear from the School's response whether this information is available from other sources."

The district is also asked to provide information that examines whether the public interest in obtaining the requested information outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy.

Arthur also noted that it is uncertain how the record can't be segregated so that non-exempt portions can be provided.

"The outcome reinforces the strong protections under Massachusetts' Public Records Law and sets an important precedent for public accountability in local government and education systems," Batory wrote.

Pittsfield, Mass., Public Schools Public Records Request by iBerkshires.com


Tags: Pittsfield High,   Pittsfield Public Schools,   public records,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

BRTA Focuses on a New Run Schedule

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Berkshire Regional Transit Authority is still working on maintaining its run schedules after dropping the route realignment proposal.

Last Thursday's meeting was Administrator Kathleen Lambert's first official meeting taking over the reins; retiring director Robert Malnati stayed during a transition period that ended last month.

Lambert is trying to create a schedule that will lessen cancellations. There was a two-hour meeting the week before with the drivers union to negotiate run bids and Lambert is working with the new operating company Keolis, which is taking over from Transdev.

The board spoke about anonymous emails from drivers, which Lambert said she has not seen. iBerkshires was not able to see those letters, but has received some. 

"They were lengthy emails from someone describing themselves as concerning BRTA employee, and there was a signed letter from a whole group of employees basically stating their concerns. So, you know, to me, it was a set of whistleblowers, and that, what my understanding is that this really triggers a need for some type of process to review the merits of these whistleblowers, not going to call them accusations, but basically expressions of concern," said member Stephen Bannon.

A letter iBerkshires received spoke of unhappy drivers who were considering quitting because of decisions being made without "input from frontline staff," frustration and falling morale, and the removal of the former general manager shortly after Lambert came in.

Lambert said it's difficult to navigate a new change. She also noted many drivers don't want to do Saturday runs and it has been hard negotiating with drivers on the new runs.

"I would like you all to keep in mind that the process of change is super difficult. Transdev has been here for 20 years, and some of these drivers have never known any other operating company, the way some of the operations have been handled has been archaic," she said. "So getting folks up to speed on how a modern transit system works is going to be painful for them. So I don't want to say that I'm unsympathetic, because I am sympathetic, but I am trying to coax people along with a system that's going to seem very strange to them."

The board spoke about better communication between them and Lambert, citing cooperation will be best moving forward.

"There's just a lot of stuff in the air right now, and there are a lot of fires to put out to make this a coordinated effort. And if we don't keep our communications open and be straightforward, then you get blindsided about how you know the input that you could get from us about your position, and how you know what's going on in your direction, and we get blindsided. And I think that we have to make sure that this is a collaboration," said member Sherry Youngkin.

"Both sides have responsibilities, because in the long run, this advisory board is going to have to make decisions as to how we brought forward and if we've gone forward in a fair and helpful way. And I think that's hopefully what everybody is looking for also." 

Transdev and Keolis held a three-day recruiting event interviewing almost 40 candidates and offering jobs to eight, but only three stayed on to start training. Lambert said it was disappointing but she will keep trying to retain more people.

In her first report to the board, she noted that ridership dipped a little over 10 percent, but still remains higher than last year, adding that was because of cancellations of services because of the lack of drivers.

Like the last meeting, some of the advisory board members were torn over the start of the Link413 service, worried that the start of the service took drivers away and the numbers of riders are low.

Lambert, however, said the ridership has doubled from last month.

"As I've spoken before, we have, generally, a six-month adoption for brand-new service before you can really go in and evaluate, are you being successful based on the grant that my predecessor wrote along with the team for PBTA and RTA, we are ahead of schedule, which is pretty good, so I'm hoping that will continue to improve," she said.

Member Renee Wood said the board never approved the service, adding the only thing she could find in the minutes was a vote to accept the equipment. She said it was supposed to be put on the agenda to discuss.

"The Link413 service has been three years in the making. It's been a grant that was accepted and has been working with our partners, PVTA and FRTA, to put into place. So I don't have the entire history of how that process worked, but it's been three years in the making, and did we not understand that once we accept that grant that we were going to put in new service?" Lambert said.

The board discussed if Title VI, the Civil Rights Act, was followed with an accurate review and accurate amount of time for public comment period on the service changes and if its attorney should review if the  grant conditions were properly followed.

Lambert said changes had the 60-day comment period included in the proposed route realignment packet, giving the opportunity for the community to respond to that as well but will look into the legality of the situation with their attorney.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories